Breaking the chains, winning the games, and saving Western Civilization.

Saturday, May 7, 2011

Rapebait

I find myself wondering if the brilliant women who came up with the notion of slut-walking against rape also advocate dangling red meat in front of large predators in cages.

Remember the cop in Toronto who said that women who don’t want to be sexually assaulted shouldn’t “dress like sluts“? Well, activists in Toronto and elsewhere are fighting back! Toronto has organized the SlutWalk this Sunday. Come out for the march and stand up for every women who’s ever been told if only her hemline were longer, she might not have been raped. There is no justification for sexual assault – ever – and it’s time to stop slut-shaming and victim-blaming.

I find the clueless, histrionic response to the Toronto cop's perfectly sensible remarks to be both amusing and all too predictable. As I have repeatedly pointed out, many women absolutely hate the idea that their decisions and actions have any consequences and feminists have been actively fighting reality in this manner for literal decades. They were complaining about this when Camille Paglia was pointing out that it is just as stupid to get drunk and go to a man's room in a frat house as it is to leave your purse unattended in Central Park more than 20 years ago.

Now, a woman doesn't deserved to get raped simply because she is a slut. That would be tantamount to saying that all women deserve to be raped, since all women have at least a modicum of slut in them; Athol Kay even goes so far as to say that a woman's ability to unlock and slake her inner slut within her marriage is an important aspect of a happy and successful marriage. I tend to find sluts fairly likeable, for the most part, especially those who are sluts because they enjoy riding the alpha carousel as opposed to those who are merely ideologically slutty due to their incoherent feminism. And yet, I don't shed any more tears over a slut getting raped than I do over a gambler winding up broke. It's not inevitable, but the odds are what they are.

The reason the slut-walk is ludicrously counter-productive is because encouraging more women to dress and act in a provocative manner in public places is literally asking for more rape and sexual assault. The slut-walkers are daring men to respond to their provocations, and there can be no question that the predatory part of the male population will be quite pleased to do so at the earliest opportunity. Just as you don't teach a tiger to stop devouring steak by continuously waving a bloody t-bone in front of it, you can't encourage rapists not to rape by appealing to their visual senses. Even animals understand that an effective way to avoid becoming prey is to not look like prey, so it is remarkable that feminists have managed to functionally lobotomize themselves to such an extent that they are now operating below the level of lower animal intelligence.

The amusingly ironic aspect of this is the way the slut walk flies in the face of feminist rape ideology. After all, if rape is a matter of power, and not sex as the feminists insist, then both the way a woman dresses and the slut-walking are entirely irrelevant. But then, Canada is a relatively free country and if young women wish to make themselves rapebait, then we should neither be bothered by their actions or the potential consequences of those actions. In any event, it is less a woman's appearance than her behavior that increases the likelihood that she will be sexually assaulted. A woman who wears nothing but fishnet bikinis but doesn't go unaccompanied to strange men's dwellings or stay out past midnight is much less likely to be raped than a girl who dresses tastefully, but is willing to party with strangers.

60 comments:

VaalDonkie
said...

I've wondered about this for a while now. It is my experience that women put it out there and then pull it back at the last moment in a sick game of cat and mouse. Now, it's a fun game if both parties are relatively well-adjusted, but do women ever consider that some men might be a little unbalanced and might demand to have what they were promised?

For instance, there's the stereotypical ex-convict who hasn't seen a woman for years. Or the Aspie who doesn't "get" the teasing and reads the woman's signals as real interest. Or the foreign man who is not used to slutty behaviour NOT leading to sex.

" It is my experience that women put it out there and then pull it back at the last moment in a sick game of cat and mouse."

You have described a situation where the woman is in charge of the relationship and determining what happens when. Your responsibility, as a man, is to be the one in charge of the relationship. If you don't understand her and can't anticipate her thinking and behavior well enough to counteract her attempts to do things like this, the relationship is doomed. If you _do_ have the social dominance that a man should have, you should be able to take her attempts to do this and flip the script on her - she'll find herself playing into your hands and liking it.

I'm referring to the pick-up scene. I've been in an awesome relationship for close on eight years. I can't say I've ever experienced that kind of behaviour in almost a decade. But then I told my girlfriend right at the start that I won't take shit in a relationship. ever. I also told her that I wouldn't give her shit.

I "victim blaming" does get old. It isn't about rights, it's about common sense. I have the legal right to walk through the ghetto in a suit counting a stack of cash at 3 am, but I'm behaving in a way that makes me ripe to get the hell beat out of me... and I doubt that anyone is going to organize a "let's walk through bad neighborhoods counting our cash" event in order to protest blaming the victim for it.

Of course, adults understand the difference between blaming the victim for the crime and blaming the victim for poor judgment, which also explains why feminists don't understand the difference.

On January 24, 2011, a representative of the Toronto Police Service was quoted saying, "People should avoid jaywalking in order to not be hit by cars."

Walkwalk aims to combat the myth of "the jsywalker" and the culture of victim blaming that prevails the world over.

Our mission is to enforce the truth that those who experience vehicular assault are never at fault-- no exceptions. We seek to combat a culture that teaches "don't get hit by cars," as opposed to "don't hit people with cars."

Walkwalk is for everyone: singles, couples, parents, sisters, brothers, friends. People with bikes, skateboards, scooters, rollerblades or any other human-powered transportation are welcome! Come walk, roll, strut, holler, and stomp with us in demand of a revised cultural attitude toward vehicular assault and jaywalking.

"Of course, adults understand the difference between blaming the victim for the crime and blaming the victim for poor judgment, which also explains why feminists don't understand the difference."

The only real issue is when the defense attorney tries to make it sound like it IS a woman's fault for her skirt. It's ludicrous to imply that a man deserves to have a woman regardless of her rights because she is showing off some leg. However, I do agree that every woman should use their judgment to prevent being in situations in which she could be raped. I highly disagree with the feminists who bash the "safety first to prevent rape" kind of advice simply because they don't think we women should have the burden of taking measures to protect ourselves.

Seriously, doesn't anyone ever consider that women who are wearing slutty outfits are more likely to be raped because there is less clothing to tear off?

And nobody here has said that women deserve to be forcibly raped because they are wearing slutty clothing. Of course, if you don't understand the jaywalking analogy, then we just can't help you understand that point either.

@Emily said..."The only real issue is when the defense attorney tries to make it sound like it IS a woman's fault for her skirt."____________

True, and none of us here debate that. That would be like a defense attorney defending a mugger by saying his victim was "walking after dark in a bad neighborhood counting the cash he just got from an ATM... he wanted to give my client his money!" The victim may have acted stupidly, but pointing that isn't the same as blaming the victim of defending the criminal. You seem to agree.

What's amusing is when the subject is paternity fraud or maternity fraud, these same feminists do nothing but blame the victim, by stating the very words "he knew the risk when he ______" and they truly do not only justify the culprit, the want to financially reward them too. Funny how their position changes when money flows their way.

I trust Vox will be forgiving, as is (I assume) his So. Baptist Christian belief dictates, since the victim "had it coming" and the perp couldn't help themselves,, when his mother/wife/daughter/friend or he is violently raped and the defense is: "look how s/he was dressed." If he (or you) truly accepts the points raised, he should not seek justice or retribution from the law or elsewhere when the event occurs.

Vox, you need to remember that not all rape victims are sexy enticing young women. Cripples, nuns, invalids, old women, housewives with kids, prepubescent girls, middle-aged and not-very-healthy-looking women...all of those are well known to have been targeted by rapists, more than once. VD's apparent ignorance of this well-documented fact proves he's not only stupid, but callously uncaring. His entire thesis about rape fails because it's based on a false premise.

Vox doesn't deserve to get the crap kicked out of him simply because he's an idiot. That would be tantamount to saying that all people deserve to have the crap kicked out of them, since everybody has at least a modicum of idiocy in them. And yet, I wouldn't shed any more tears if Vox got the crap kicked out of him than I would over a gambler going broke. It's not inevitable, but the odds are what they are.

So, basically, according to you, all men are just animals unable to help themselves from raping a woman if they find them even remotely sexually attractive. Well, I can only conclude that you're speaking purely from your own experience, about yourself, as I am a man, and am perfectly capable of restraining myself from immediately jumping on the nearest woman who shows a bit of flesh. Even if you're saying that women should never, ever, ever dress in any way that could be taken as sexually provocative in order to protect themselves from rapists only, then, by the same token, no-one, male or female, should so much as go out of their house and walk down the street, ever, just in case there's a killer lurking around, looking for their next victim.

Anonymous idiot: "Riiight ... because men are just like animal predators, who have no self-control and can never resist temptation!"

No, not all, but some are predators, and either have no self control, or wish not to exercise such. That is a fact of life,and those who are at risk from predators need to deal with it... or the predators will deal with them.

Most women and men are raped by people they know more than a few minutes or hours. This whole gross conversation misses the point.

We should be expecting much more from men not just dumping on women. I can admit that there is risk in wearing certain things especially at certain times and locations. But we are all free to take risks: getting into a car, jaywalking, talking on your smart phone at night, leaving your house unguarded, getting out of shape so that you can't defend yourself in a fight. But these are things we don't always think twice about/they are a part of us. Women want to feel attractive, they don't want to get raped and then blamed for it. Society for the most part accepts and celebrates sexy scantily clad women. It's no surprise that lots of women dress like that thinking it's a safe fun thing to do.

There are lots of ways to be manly, gentleness is one of them, not snorting about how stupid women are for not getting that men are domineering animals. But I can't expect followers of this blog to agree with something they can't understand.

Sorry boys but you're full of shit. I could defend this with more words than you could deal with but there's no point. Your sad little egos simply cannot fathom that a woman who dresses in a way as to elicit attention does not deserve to be assaulted/accosted/harmed in any way. You'll rationalize it all day simply because women like that make YOU feel uncomfortable.

I swear, the lengths that men will go through to subjugate women. What's worse, you're all too stupid to realize what I'm talking about... at all.

Crap man. They only reason I'm posting without a name is because I am pretty sure you're nuts. I don't want to get any insane near me. I just want to ask one question. What separates you from the Muslim extremist? I hope you don't have any daughters. If you do, hopefully they don't dress 'slutty' near daddy.

And nobody here has said that women deserve to be forcibly raped because they are wearing slutty clothing. Of course, if you don't understand the jaywalking analogy, then we just can't help you understand that point either.

And anyone who cannot see the problem with the jaywalking analogy is beyond help.

Given that rape still occurs, frequently, in countries requiring by law that women cover up in the most extreme manner, I would suggest that dress has nothing to do with it.

If women get raped in jogging bottoms on their way home from the gym (recent case) and in business suits on their way home from work (recent case) it seems absurd to point to another case and where a girl was wearing a clubbing outfit and suggest this was the overriding, or even contributing, factor that made her a target.

Lovely attitude you have there though, dear blogger. Presumably all men with any sort of sexual appetite are sluts too?

The Anonymous above has an excellent point. Rape happens to women in ALL modes of dress, and that's what SlutWalk is all about.

Very interesting: I read that while many participants show up in slutty attire, others, especially past victims of assault, show up in the outfit they happened to be wearing when they were assaulted--jeans, casual workwear, and pajamas, sporting signs that say "Do I look like a slut? I was wearing THIS when I was raped." Which is the most effective answer to that rather misinformed police officer's statement. In short, rape can happen to anyone, wearing anything. It's the rapist who decides to rape, and no one else's. NO ONE DESERVES to be raped, no matter what.

In the abstract, nobody deserves to be robbed or assaulted or the victim of ANY injustice any time.So what?We don't live in the abstract and as a result it becomes essential for guys to be careful to whom they show their neck or talk crap.Are women entitled though to live in a perfect world which has not existed or never will exist?

Anonymous, what a clueless post. Vox is not talking about men as a whole, but rapists. You don't dangle rapemeat in the eyes of rapists. Isn't that obvious to you?

Tominda,

This has nothing to do with what anyone does or does not deserve.

No one is saying that every rape victim that ever lived dresses/dressed like a slut. That would be like saying that every smoker gets cancer. Dressing like a slut just makes you a more attractive target.

There should be a requirement that you at least have the iq of a grapefruit before you can post a comment.Nobody here said that anyone deserves to be raped.vlmitchell,you're probably one of those girls that complains about men subjugating women,while you make a habit of subjugating men. You're probably an anti-male bigot. Judging by you're comments,you're one of those people who is too stupid to realize they're stupid and sexist themselves. Dumbass.

Oh, don't views uzza, everyone. Her weblog intro and female warrior avatar obviously show she is so deep into fantasy that she can no extended comprehend how the genuine world works.Cheap Runescape Gold

If you think about it, there's nothing different about us except that one gene separates male from female. Men are only better in mens' heads because some of them have enormous egos and can't keep their mouths shut, but expect women to have no ego and have no mouth. Also, to have no body because apparently our bodies have sexual appeal. Wow. Also apparently we're dumb (it's really what you want us to be, to not have much intellect. so you call us stupid and ignorant, when actually there is more than one woman to base your study on). Also, women get raped in countries where they are fully clothed, to the point where their hair is covered up and so is their face except their eyes. Your blog post is invalid. Not all women are sluts. Not all women think the way you do. There, that sentence aught to explain why it's invalid. I hope your blog gets thrown in a lake and buried six feet down into the earth. I would never date a man like you. I'm afraid that if I married you, I might get myself into an abusive relationship and can't say no to intercourse because you begin to beat me or annoy the hell out of me. Actually if you annoyed me, made me mad, hit me, I would walk out the door. I would walk out because I didn't like you. Because you obviously didn't care. Not because you annoyed me or made me mad, but because you're an asshole. I think that's how you stereotype women. You annoy them, they hate you. You won't leave them fucking alone, of course they'll hate you! Can't understand them? Too self-centered. Obviously! They won't tell you something? Maybe... hey maybe you should leave them fucking alone and crush your curiosity because you're supposed to care about them. MAYBE WOMEN HAVE FEELINGS??? SUCH DISCOVER [wow intensifies]bye